Live data from Hacker News

This maze looks familiar

krazydad.com

31–40 of 138 posts

Re: This maze looks familiar

#31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. More than one person's hands at the company are almost assuredly dirty here. Maybe not directly, but indirectly. No consumer packaged goods company, least of all a giant like Kraft, puts anything onto a box without many layers of approval and rounds of creative review. In this case, the buck presumably stops with the brand manager for the Mac & Cheese product. I doubt he or she would have even thought to ask abo…

As you say, it could be some freelance designer or artist whom they commissioned make the maze, and that artist committed fraud against both their customer and the real producer by passing KrazyDad's work off as his own. The company can't really double-check against out-and-out fraud. (I still think they should have financial responsibility, paying the real artist what they paid the supposed artist, even if they are…

IANAL, and I can't really say whether a court would hold them to have been reasonably responsible for vetting this in their review process. But I do know their review process exists, and that it's very extensive, and that a court would probably not be inclined to give them a pass for ignorance -- even if they had no idea. Even if a freelancer committed fraud against them in passing this off as his own, they are economic beneficiaries of the artwork. So I don't think (?) they'd get a pass. (Would actually welcome a lawyer's input on this thread w/r/t that scenario. EDIT: A lawyer has joined in.)

Whatever the case may be, Kraft should do the right thing here. That probably means paying KrazyDad a fee or royalty of some kind, commensurate with the standard that they'd pay a typical artist whose original work graced their package. They should also issue a formal apology and pledge to improve their review process.

If Nickelodeon / MTV Networks was also involved, things get messier, and maybe there's a he-said, she-said dynamic that plays out. In any event, none of these folks are dummies. I sincerely hope, and would even expect, that they'll contact KrazyDad to make remedy.

Re: This maze looks familiar

#32
post #19
post #9

Hypothetical question: is it possible that they did not copy it? The author here indicates that the original maze was generated by software, maybe Kraft stumbled upon the same algorithm, or a close variation of it (considering the minor differences between the two)? Obviously, this is very out-of-left-field and I don't believe it either, but it's not impossible that Kraft didn't plagiarise anything.

Under some jurisdictions (eg Germany), I'm not sure whether the output of a program is copyrightable at all. Your software, yes, but probably not the output.

First result I found discussing the issue: http://the-digital-reader.com/2013/09/13/friday-fun-autonomo... US doesn't seem as clear as you thought, maybe!

Re: This maze looks familiar

#33
post #30
post #25

Sure, copyright infringement, plagiarism, but not theft! Copying is not theft! We need to hear this more often. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GU7axyrHWDQ

Luckily, neither the essay nor anyone else in this thread are talking about theft.

From TFA:

> If you’re gonna steal a maze, you might want to try stealing from maze book #47, and do a horizontal swap on it before you rotate it 90 degrees.

Re: This maze looks familiar

#34
I see literally thousands of mazes generated on the site, and (unless I"m mistaken) they are all simply generated output from a computer program. Its cool, but is it even possible to copyright something like this?

Re: This maze looks familiar

#35

I see literally thousands of mazes generated on the site, and (unless I"m mistaken) they are all simply generated output from a computer program. Its cool, but is it even possible to copyright something like this?

A number of people have attempted to claim copyright on the output of programs. One of the most infamous examples is how Wolfram claims copyright over the output of Wolfram Alpha.

http://yro-beta.slashdot.org/story/09/07/30/2055221/how-wolf...

Re: This maze looks familiar

#36
post #29

At what point do a series of angled lines become copywritable? After two lines? Three? Can I copywrite two lines meeting at 67 degrees, and then claim angles 65-69 as like works? Can I then claim that your maze contains my intellectual property in several places? (And would you still feel your rights were violated had kraft taken two of your mazes and glued them together?)

It's a matter of arriving at the result. In other words, what matters is whether you used the original (and with what intent), not whether you arrived at the same result. Unfortunately, both of these are hard to prove.

Not exactly intuitive, I'd agree; see e.g. this: http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/entry/23

(Oh, and it's "copyright")

Re: This maze looks familiar

#37

I see literally thousands of mazes generated on the site, and (unless I"m mistaken) they are all simply generated output from a computer program. Its cool, but is it even possible to copyright something like this?

Does Microsoft own my powerpoints?

Re: This maze looks familiar

#38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. More than one person's hands at the company are almost assuredly dirty here. Maybe not directly, but indirectly. No consumer packaged goods company, least of all a giant like Kraft, puts anything onto a box without many layers of approval and rounds of creative review. In this case, the buck presumably stops with the brand manager for the Mac & Cheese product. I doubt he or she would have even thought to ask abo…

As you say, it could be some freelance designer or artist whom they commissioned make the maze, and that artist committed fraud against both their customer and the real producer by passing KrazyDad's work off as his own. The company can't really double-check against out-and-out fraud. (I still think they should have financial responsibility, paying the real artist what they paid the supposed artist, even if they are…

In these circumstances, the company will have committed the copyright infringement also by virtue of reproducing the maze on the packs, and will therefore be exposed to a potential suit (assuming the other requirements of copyright infringement are able to be shown).

At the same time, the company will have taken an indemnity from the freelancer which means they can go against the freelancer for costs arising from a third party claim of infringement (as is the case here). This would give the company the ability to settle with the third party and then go against the freelancer for the sums.

The principal problem with this is that the freelancer is unlikely to have assets to back the indemnity (unless as a condition of their provision of work they were required to have in place insurance). Even with insurance of course, it may not be available if the freelancer has behaved fraudulently...

Re: This maze looks familiar

#39
post #29

At what point do a series of angled lines become copywritable? After two lines? Three? Can I copywrite two lines meeting at 67 degrees, and then claim angles 65-69 as like works? Can I then claim that your maze contains my intellectual property in several places? (And would you still feel your rights were violated had kraft taken two of your mazes and glued them together?)

s/copywrite/copyright/

With regard to your question, it depends on whether it passes the Threshold of Originality: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threshold_of_originality

Re: This maze looks familiar

#40
post #21
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Under some jurisdictions (eg Germany), I'm not sure whether the output of a program is copyrightable at all. Your software, yes, but probably not the output.

Wait, the information you type into a text editor or draw in Illustrator is not copywritable in Germany?

That depends on the complexity of possible inputs and the complexity of possible outputs - if your text editor would only allow for single-character documents, I imagine its output might not be copyrightable ;)
Post reply on HN